Sometimes people say they are worried about comments made on various Web sites and how they will affect people looking at Albert Lea from the outside. I say three things in response:

1. Dialogue is a sign of a healthy and vibrant community. People looking at coming to a city generally like it when they see citizens involved in issues. Don’t you see healthy dialogue in big cities? Don’t we want Albert Lea to be a bigger city? If we hope to grow, let’s not quash dialogue. Let’s encourage it. If we want to be a bigger city, we need to act like one, which includes tolerating others’ views.

In fact, people move to free-thinking places because they feel like they can say what they want to say and be who they want to be. It’s called freedom. Shutting down the comments section of a Web site isn’t going to result in Albert Lea having better fortune in economic development and population growth.

2. Most of the comments made online at AlbertLeaTribune.com or even albertlea.com are non-controversial and constructive. It’s just that people have a tendency to remember the fights and attacks. It’s the same for the regular newspaper. We can write all the so-called “positive” stories in the world, but if we write one “negative” story, people bash us for writing only “negative” news. Such bashes actually show how those people are failing to pay attention.

By the way, I think the terms positive and negative are for people who cannot articulate their points. I look at stories as just stories. I don’t focus on positive or negative at all. No self-respecting journalist does. Truth is truth.

Also, I am quite proud of how the dialogue on the Web site has improved since our new format began last year. The biggest problem really are newcomers who haven’t figured out how to play nice yet. The regular users are generally resourceful and offer sound arguments. They now police each other and shun personal attacks. I defend readers of print and online editions.

3. If people in Albert Lea are so worried about impressions, how come our city has such a limited entry in Wikipedia?

Wikipedia is a site to which anyone can contribute. Are there so few local concerned citizens that none wish to contribute to the wiki? The Albert Lea entry even says Randy Erdman is the mayor.

Albert Lea has an introduction with the basics. It has history, government, geography, demographics and notable natives. The education part is really just a links area, which Wikipedia discourages. Wikipedia would rather give people the raw information they seek, not a link to some site that may or may not have answers. For instance, if someone wants to know the graduation rate for Albert Lea Area Schools, it might be hard to find digging through the district site, but on Edina’s Wikipedia entry, bam, it’s right there.

Let’s check out Edina’s entry.

It has what Albert Lea has but it also has useful prose about education, economy and recreation. Doesn’t posting information about the local economy on Albert Lea’s Wikipedia entry just make economic sense? That is, assuming we are so worried about Albert Lea’s impression on the rest of the world.

Rochester even features a climate chart. Don’t people wanting to move somewhere like to know what the climate is like? The average high temperature in Rochester in April is 55 degrees. The average low is 34. The average rainfall is 2.8 inches. the average snowfall is 4 inches.

Of course, Rochester has a section about the economy and the stuff Edina has. It also has a section about transportation. There’s even a neat part about sites of interest, such as the ear of corn water tower. The entry lists media, arts and entertainment. Wow! Somebody in Rochester cares about the impression Rochester makes on the rest of the world. Apparently, people from the world must go there.

Tribune Managing Editor Tim Engstrom’s column appears every Tuesday.